Monday, February 21, 2011

Weekend Update

Congratulations are in order for the Fort Worth Tri-Level team, as they won a squeaker over Jason Freeman's Houston team by pulling out a 10-8 third set breaker in the 4.0 line. Legendary captain Bob Somabut came up big ON the court this time, and spanked a backhand winner on match point to seal the deal.

Fort Worth will be headed to Indian Wells to compete at Tri-Level nationals, playing aside Rafael Nadal and Maria Sharapova and the rest of the stellar field in the beautiful Coachella Valley. Best of luck to Joel Pickett's crew. He was a class act throughout the weekend.

It was a good weekend for some of my fellow Metropolitan Racquet Club members in the major zone held in San Antonio this weekend. Rob Collins, who was seeded sixth, took home the Open Singles crown, beating Adrian Valdez along the way and not dropping a set. Top seeded Matt Drake took home the 4.0 crown and his first major zone.

The Houston area had a good showing overall. John Patch took the 4.5 singles and Tim Green won another 5.0 singles major zone, though the field had only five participants. Hats off to Cy-Ridge alumni Jason Owsley and Tommy Do, who reached the semis in the 4.0 doubles. Do also made it to the semis of the singles.

184 comments:

Scott Foster and Jason Pieters also from Houston got to the finals in the Men's Open doubles. Jason Pieters won the mixed open doubles partnered with former UT player Ristine Olson. In the women's Congrats to Zercoe/Reed taking home the 4.5 doubles,also Ava Deline took home the 4.0 singles. Houston really had a great showing this past weekend in San Antonio.

Bob was probably better than average, but definately not at the top end. He did get moved up though.

Houston gets fucked because they have to use end of year ratings in tri-level and other cities can use mid-years. Bob could not have played 4.0 in Houston. Still don't believe he won though. Montes or Rios must have had one of their bad days.

I believe Pete called it (via FB). He's a choke artist. Referring back to some previous posts on Pete. Great strokes. The dude's got the game but what may keep him down at 4.0 for at least this year is his consistency and shot selection. When the chips are down can you deliver the goods. That's why in case there ever was any question, at 4.0 Vu is at another level than Rios.

From what I heard it was a combination of bad play from vu and rios. they struggled all weekend trying to gel together. Rios will not stay 4.0 for the whole season. He is an appealed player playing on a 4.5 team.

Wow, I guess both Vu and Rios should stick with singles. Apparently they are not good at doubles. Both players in singles would be unbeatable but doubles is a different story. I believe Alex E. from last year Tri Level destroyed Bob in the finals like 6-1, 6-1.

Vu and Rios didn't click this weekend like I expected them to. They have vastly different styles and are both comfortable mainly on the ad side, so I think in this case the whole was less than the sum of their parts. They're both very talented at both singles and doubles, however, and should be tough to deal with this season.

The Houston 4.5 line was fun to watch. Greg Jones and Orlando Galvan seemed to have great chemistry both on and off the court and fit in well with the rest of the team, even the benchwarmers and "lowly" 3.5's. They had their hands full in the finals, dropping the first set before bageling Ft. Worth in the second and taking the breaker.

Dallas league will be very competitive this year, and they should have several good teams. There are, frankly, more high-powered captains in Dallas in the 4.0 world (Somabut, Pickett, Sisk and Arcaria) which makes for a higher brand of competition.

I got to meet John Sisk, the much-criticized Dallas captain, over the weekend as well. He had one quality that almost all successful captains have: he was very likable and I'm sure has no trouble charming potential players into joining his squad. I'll be curious to see how things turn out in big D.

I'm always a pessimist, but I think the Houston 4.0 team will be an underdog to whichever team emerges from Dallas. Right now I don't see a Houston 4.5 team that will be a factor on a statewide level, but a lot can change in the next couple of months.

There doesn't seem to be an obvious "super-team" developing in Houston 4.5 for the summer but, like hacker said, a lot can happen in the next couple months. It will be interesting to see what develops. Not even sure who the top couple favorites would be at this point. Ideas?

BOBBY FOX REPORT:just looked at last night's singles results. fox 4.0 vs mccool 5.0. fox was up 6-4, 5-3 and mccool retired? what type of chicken sh$t is that? mccool is rated 5.0, but he's really a top 4.5 player. i'm impressed with fox so far. quitting at 5-3 in the second set? really? are u that afraid to take a lost? is mccool the jay cutler of tennis?

I wonder how the retooled ratings of the last 2 years has affected the women's side. It seems it has done a good job of leveling out the 4.0s and 4.5s for the most part (with the exception of Danny Vu - but a few will always slip through the cracks). Also, the other cities. Thoughts from any of the women captains and/or Dallas/Austin/San Antonio

He broke both strings in both of his rackets and only had 2 with him so don't start incorrect rumors and information until you have all the facts straight and he couldn't find his teammates to borrow other rackets because we were on other courts playing.

It's gonna be another down year for Houston. The 4.0 team probably has a slightly better chance to make it past Dallas than the 4.5 team. It will depend a lot on how Rios develops his game and if he can keep his 4.0 "A" rating. Vu will be a solid singles line but not sure after that. 4.5 team will be decent but not great.

Ouch. Kind of harsh! Pete's a good guy. I wouldn't blame him if he opts to play the higher level / better tennis. Let's not jump to conclusions. Maybe 11:08 should not make such bold statements without using spellchecker first.

Ummm whoever said Rios is a 4.5? There's a reason he has a 4.0 rating. That being said he has huge potential and as stated before with work on his consistency and shot selection will surely be a 4.5 down the road. I think the real question is and has been whether or not he will be an impact player in 4.0 (assuming he doesn't get DQd)

the question is not that goldberg is good. goldberg is a good 4.5 player and a good benchmark. the question is rios a 4.0 or 4.5 player? well i dont think he can beat goldberg. however, i think he can beat most of top 4.0 player and some average 4.5 player. his rating is 4.0, so take advantage of the 4.0 success. 4.5 is another animal and he will get chomp down by the top 4.5s. he'll be lucky if any 4.5 summer team will use him in singles

Thanks for the compliments Mr. Anonymous. If I had your name I would thank you personally. I hope and working on to be a top 4.5 player in leagues and tournaments in 2011. I agree with the 9:56am posting.

I am a new captain and a bit confused. The league coordinator didn't return my call; so I was wondering if anybody on here understands the rules. I thought there was a rule that I had to get matches made up or maybe just scheduled by 2 weeks after the match was supposed to be played. The other captains that I tried to reschedule with just laughed. This is a pain in the a$$.

If someone joins the usta, skips the self-rate, then plays a levels tourny, will they get a "T" rating? If so, how long before the "T" rating appears on tennislink? Then would the player be able to join a usta summer league team with only a "T" rating?

The other thing is, and I may be wrong about this, but I thought M and T exclusive rated players still need to Self-Rate to play USTA League. This was a huge hole in the system that the USTA fixed. In other words, if you tank in tournaments this year and end up with a 4.0 T rating you would still have to self-rate next year to play USTA league

@632a - Not sure what the rules spell out on this topic, but typically makeups happen at the end of the season in my experience.

For example if you play on Thursday's then both teams will be booked on Thursday through the season and it is a PITA to get folks together on another night due to courts, other league or personal conflicts.

PS - I am not sure if there is a league coordinator at this point in time, so you might use this place for guidance...

Lance Loken, perhaps you can speak to this. Didn't JJ Deleon and Dan Solis end up with 4.5M ratings at the end of the year and are now 4.0 self rates? That seems like a huge loophole and a little shady to me.

My understanding of this new ruling on Ms and Ts is that Ms and Ts have to self-rate and furthermore, they can NOT self-rate below their most recent M or T rating. I wonder what happens if an M or T crosses an age threashold. In other words I'm a 5.0 M D1 college player at age 42 and don't play for 3 years. Technically I could self rate 4.5 at age 45 so why should I be required to self-rate as a 5.0 3 years later.

Does the USTA or HTA have any way to automatically catch players that use a secondary address to create a new USTA account, and then try to establish themselves at a lower level via "T" or "S" rating? Could they match on name, SSN, or b-day? Or is it simply up to other players/captains to discover the charade?

I believe it's an honor system. Captains and players need to keep a vigilant watch over this type of thing. I think someone caught on that Ed Hess had an alternate USTA number last year. The tennis community is small and tight and I'd be very surprised unless someone is new to the area that anyone could get away with this with noone noticing.

I don't think it is shady for JJ and Dan to self-rate as 4.0. I think they are 4.0 players overall, but with good partners, they can hang pretty decently in many 4.5 doubles matches. They are a good example of that group of players whose doubles skills are almost 0.5 higher than their singles skills. The question is, when self-rating, should you focus on the best of your singles ability, or the best of your doubles ability, given good partners?

The answer is there is a glitch in the USTA rating system. Just as TennisLink was broken when they released the new website, the USTA instituted a new rule which is not being regulated. And the fact is according to the way the computer is rating players these days, JJ and Dan should be 4.5. I'm not saying it's shady because the issue as to where to self-rate is very grey these days but according to the rules they should not have been able to self-rate as 4.0 if their YER is 4.5M.

My guess is you can self-rate whatever you want as long as you are with in the profiling guidelines. Actually according to the rules if you choose to play USTA league you must play at the higher level between your YER M rating and your self-rate. So it sounds like this does not get caught until you try to sign up for a team and nothing wrong was done by self-rating below your M rating. The real question is if this is the honor system or if it is really caught in the sign-up process. Guess we'll find out if JJ and/or Dan try to play on a 4.0 team in the summer. So - NO - JJ and Dan have not done anything wrong YET!

Yes, 1:07 does pose a scenario that would work and be legit. Any other scenario would be a computer glitch that needs to be fixed, the USTA doesn't need to rely on honor when it has rules and data. I can tell you the USTA is researching the matter. And Ed Hess did not cheat, he was told by the USTA to create a new registration to get around another system glitch.

Good question 2:09, the USTA Regs are silent on that, the changes for 2011 just address the self-rating that M-rated players now have to do. Looks like nothing's changed for T's, they don't have to self-rate (I could be wrong). But I think the effect is no different than being an S, a T can still be DQ'ed. But I think it's only for S-rated players that ALL prior matches are forfeited; for A and T only the last match is forfeited.

Can't play HTA or USTA non-mixed, non-combo league with an M or T rating. Go look, you won't find anyone signed up in the Spring with anything other than B, C, A or S.

This isn't new info. It's been this way since December 1, 2010.

There is no glitch. JJ and Dan are perfectly fine. I have no first hand knowledge but I'm confident they simply appealed their 4.5M rating to a 4.0A (not 4.0M, but the "M" still attaches to the 4.5M-appealed rating), forcing them to self-rate when signing up for the Copperfield team. There has been several players do this, you just haven't seen them because they haven't signed up for a team yet and they haven't played on any 2011 teams.

Hi all,Sorry for responding until just now but have been out on the road all day with work. JJ and Dan had M ratings and were allowed an opportunity to appeal as they registered for my 4.0 team this spring. When they registered, they were provided the opportunity to self-rate as they had a 4.5M rating for mixed only and therefore appealed and were allowed to self rate as a 4.0. Not sure why anyone would challenge these two guys as they are not 4.5 players.

Looks like JJ and Solis just got caught. Hopefully, they will not play 4.0s or if they do they should be called out as cheaters, just like everybody else that cheats. What is worst cheating or tanking?

I don't play on Copperfield or give a crap about Solis and JJ. However, no one has presented any evidence that anyone is cheating.

Some marginal 4.0/4.5 player appealing and playing 4.0 is not what is wrong with USTA tennis. It's Davis Cup players lying on their self-rate and being allowed to play 4.5 the whole season once the lie is uncovered that is the problem.

JJ and Dan didn't cheat. As I said, when they registered for the 4.0 spring season the computer asked them to self rate and so they self rated as a 4.0. Based on what happened, I guess a person could play mixed only for a year and obtain a "M" rating and then self rate the following year. This is the 1st time I've seen it.

First of all, as previously stated we can't go by how it used to be as far as ratings go. There are a lot of players who would say they shouldn't be where they currently are but obviously the USTA is making it easier for players to get bumped up and hardrd to get bumped down (that's a good thing, isn't it). There is NO ONE immune to the current state of the current rating system.

Second of all, as prevsiously stated, anyone who knows JJ and Dan knows they are good guys and not cheaters. One of the following scenarious has occured.

a) The computer is flawed (wow imagine that) - Dan and JJ should not have been allowed to self-rate below their M rating when they signed up for Lance's team

b) the system is working as designed and we will all find out in a month or so to see if JJ and Dan are able to sign up for a 4.0 team

c) JJ and Dan appealed their 4.5M rating to a 4.0A rating and then were able to sign up on Lance's team as a 4.0S player.

In any case, it sounds like the USTA (at least I hope) is/will investigate this as no doubt these are not the only cases of this happening.

Lance, you somewhat contract yourself. At 4:22 you said, "therefore appealed and were allowed to self rate as a 4.0." then at 4:40 you said, "the computer asked them to self rate and so they self rated as a 4.0". Did they appeal to get their 4.0 rating or self-rate when they signed up. There's a big difference.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that the USTA F'd up. I honestly believe this was an oversight by JJ and Dan and they didn't even know about this new M rule. What's scary is to think of all the M players out there, in other cities and sections, in which the tennis community is not so diligent. Lots of players are about to Self-Rate to a lower level.

They appealed their 4.5M ratings (like anyone else can). The appeal was granted to 4.0A. The computer then also forced them to self-rate since their rating was based on mixed. They self-rated 4.0 to yield a 4.0S rating.

So for the clueless out there -- Appealing your rating is not cheating. Unless you have evidence that they lied on their self-rating, shut your pieholes.

Well the proof is in the pudding out of the mouth of Lance. It's not obvious from his 4:40 statement that they did appeal. He clearly indicates when they signed up they were asked to self-rate. He says nothing about appealing down first.That kind of thing can easily be verified by the USTA office.

ok you gutless wonders that stand behind your anonymous blog quotes, I'm done with you. I will talk to anyone that is man enough to show themselves and talk to me man to man. If you want to hide behind the anonymous shield and bash people, then have at it. I won't dignify your comments. I did nothing wrong, nor did any of the players that are on my team. When you are man enough to talk to me, then email me at lance@lanceloken.com.

JJ is a solid 4.0 doubles player (don't know Dan), but would get beat more time than not at 4.5. There will always be that overlap of 4.0s and 4.5s that could be at either rating. If it were me, I'd choose to play 4.0 in that scenario. Why choose to be at the bottom of the heap when you can hover toward the top? Especially speaking for all of us 40+ who are maintaining our strokes but not our speed or hand/eye coordination.

USTA LEAGUEMAJOR REGULATION CHANGES FOR 20113. Players who play exclusively in the Mixed Doubles Division and choose to participate in the Adult, Senior, and/or Super Senior Divisions the next year must enter those divisions by self-rating with the minimum rating being the higher of the self-rating or mixed exclusive rating.According to the rule they should not have self rated to 4.0. They could only self rate to 4.5 or 5.0.Htown could you explain the rule?

Don't ask me...I'm clueless. It sure does seem odd, but it's quite possible that they appealed down first. If it doesn't get cleared up next week I guess I could call Todd Reed for a clarification.

I think JJ will be one of the top 4.0's in the city, especially if all of the 4.0 bump-ups from the last couple of years have weakened the overall talent pool as much as I suspect.

The new rule which forces a player to self-rate at his last published rating is huge. HUGE. The USTA really is taking a lot of steps to try to thwart the top captains. Will it work? I don't think so. The top captains focus more energy and time into creating top teams. They will continue to dominate. Does anyone wanna' bet against any of these guys: Miller, Torres, Davis, Tatu, Freeman, Benzon, Somabut, Branch? They'll be back year after year (there are a few people threatening to break into that list).

JJ and Dan didn't cheat. As I said, when they registered for the 4.0 spring season the computer asked them to self rate and so they self rated as a 4.0. Based on what happened,3. Players who play exclusively in the Mixed Doubles Division and choose to participate in the Adult, Senior, and/or Super Senior Divisions the next year must enter those divisions by self-rating with the minimum rating being the higher of the self-rating or mixed exclusive rating.Now let me think about this JJ and Solis choose to participate in a Spring Adult division, so they must self rate. So they self rated, now this is the part where they did something wrong. You must self rate with the minimum rating being the higher of the self-rating or mixed exclusive rating.Their M rating was 4.5 which is greater than 4.0. So I am thinking they should have not self rated at a lower number than 4.5 but I could be wrong.

The system will not allow you to rate lower than your last published rating. Even if you select a lower rating it will spit out a message to you that you MUST rate at your last published rating. The only scenario that works here is that They won their appeal from their M rating to 4.0 A and then forced to appeal. It's been said a few times already.

Negative, you are incorrect the system does not spit out message to people that are self rating. They joined a 4.0 Mens league and had to self rate because they had an M. They are supposed to self rate at a higher rating. They did not, the USTA self rating system does not stop you from entering a lower self rate than you are supposed to enter. That is why it is called self rate. Self rate is strictly based on the information the individual enters. If you put in false inforamtion you will get your desire self rate. The whole purpose of self rate is for the person to self rate himself. USTA does not have anyway to stop people entering whatever information they want. This is the purpose of the blog to police/enforce rules. This clearly needs to be investigated.If JJ and Solis appealed their rating they would both be issued an 4.0A, not a 4.0S.

It's been "Speculated" that that is what happened but never confirmed. There is a contradiction between what Lance said at 4:22 and at 4:40. Again. this can easily get cleared up by the USTA so no speculation required. Did they appeal to get 4.0 or did they self-rate to get 4.0. It's really not complex.

4:22 - This is the message you get if you try to choose anything lower than your last published rating. It will think about it and then give you this message.

Player Self-Rate Questionnaire CompletedSelected self-rate cannot be lower than the last published NTRP level. You have the right to appeal.XXXXXXX (XXXXXXXX)Must select minimum NTRP Level of 4.0• Select, then save Appropriate Self-Rate, if you wish to rate above minimum.

OR

• Appeal Self-Rate, if you feel other factors may impact your playing level.

*** The consequences of cancelling out of the process completely without saving is, that the system will assign the minimum NTRP level of 4.0. Once the system assigns an NTRP level, this level can later not be automatically appealed DOWN, only UP. ***

4:22 - That is correct! If they appealed which I believe they did they would have a 4.0A but off an M rating which will still force you to self-rate when you sign up for men's league in which case they got a 4.0S.

That is what it says if you have a B bench rating or C computer rating. If you have a M mix rating the system will let you self rate. You can not play league with a M rating you must self rate. The computer will let you self rate yourself. Alex Ellington did the same thing last year. He had a 4.5 M he joined an adult league and had to self rate. He self rated himself at 4.0. In 2010 this was legal. In 2011 the USTA want to prevent this so they made a new rule you cannot self rate at a lower level.If you don't believe me email USTA.

USTA will let you self rate if you have a M rating. That is what it says it does not say if you have an M you must Appeal and then self rate. This is clearly someone attempt to help out Solis and JJ. They made a simple mistake and probably did not even know about the 2011 rule and self rate. How could they this is a brand new rule. I know of a couple of guys in the past that did the same thing but it was allowed and now it is not. Everybody give them a break.

I agree with Lance. For those Anons who threw bombs and hide, if you are not gutless, then sign in and show us your names.

As far as the "new" League Coordinator gossip, I would label that as "No good deed goes unpunished". As it is explained to me from my sources in the League Committee. An ex-HTA coordinator goes out her way to help with a new project. Instead of thanking her for doing the work, the gutless wonder threw a bomb in the blog about her.

For these anons who were so critical about any HTA coordinators that come along, why don't YOU serve as one? Perhaps you can show all of us how it should be done. The HTA league communities can all learn from your great job!

As far as all these players ratings, why are you so jealous about other players ratings? Do you have doubts about your own ability? Or do you have doubts about the ability of the players in your team?

I noticed that the anons of this blog sound extremely petty about all 4.0 rated players in the HTA League. It seems to me that these anons are from the same team who are worried that they cannot advance to the City Playoff. LOL!

"I am so ignorant, I can't tell the difference between throwing anonymous and standing up with my name", so speak the Anon butthead @ 11.23AM."I am an upstanding citizen to call out cheaters, but I have to hide under the rock!", so speak the Anon cheaters caller @ 7.21PM.

The other anon @ 11.02AM, shows his pettiness for belly-aching about a fellow Houston tennis player's rating, who may or may not be playing in the level playing field. While somewhere in another part of the USTA league, you have the whole team consists of pros just unlike the Dibua's brothers.

If you are so concerned about a level playing field for everybody else (by pure altruism!), may be you should also visit other cities and states and try to make right what (you consider) wrong.Call me doubting Thomas on your motives. I think you (yeah the same anon, you) are just wrought with fear over other 4.0 players in the HTA since you won't have your 4.5 players anymore in the USTA season. So, as your character would normally do, you throw gutless bombs after gutless bombs. Reading as far back as I can, I finally realized that, this blog is full of your gutless bombs, fretting over others fortunes.

For some reason, Butthead thinks it'w wrong for anyone to ask questions and demand answers when there is seemingly an inconsistency between the rules and a select 2 player's actions. Apparently it means we are jeolous and doubt our own abilities. Wrong Butthead, it means we want everyone to follow the same rules. I haven't ruled out the possibility that Dan and JJ may have appealed their rating prior to self-rating but to date there has been no confirmation of that.

Copperfield is one of those clubs that likes to skate under the radar hardly noticed. They'll push the rules just like everyone else, point fingers at all the other teams in the meantime, and then when it is called out they raise their hands in the air and say, "Who me? How can you accuse me of that? Everyone else does it and why would you care about us - we never do anything anyways. Wah wah wah". Just like when Letan tried to pull a fast one last year with a 5.5 player (forget his name). If I remember right they also had one of their Pros, Steven Coyle, rated as a 3.5 at one time.

I called the USTA Texas office this morning to confirm/clarify everything up as far as JJ and Dan are concerned for the upcoming USTA season.USTA had already received Harold's protest as well as nimerous other calls from all over the USA related to the same issue. Bottom line is that Tennis Link is screwed up and the USTA is trying to fix it. New rule for 2011 is that anyone with a M rating must self rate when playing for a men's or ladies team. HOWEVER, what Tennis link is currently missing is that you can't self rate lower than your most recent M rating. This is different than in the past. The guys are allowed to play out the spring season as a 4.0 player and then will be back to a 4.5 rating come the USTA season.

I don't think JJ and Dan deliberately broke the rules. Let's give that a rest. This rule is new to the USTA and not everyone knows about it. This was a case of an opportunity presenting itself (JJ and Deleon being allowed to self-rate at 4.0) and they took it. Not impressed with the USTA these days. First the launch a broken website then they institute a rule that TennisLink cannot enforce.

They did not know about the new rule and I called immediately this morning to the USTA office to get everything cleared up and resolved. I didn't even know about this new self rate rule.Now let's move on to bigger and better matters...

Actually, it's been mentioned on the Blog a few times but I don't think anyone really understood its impact and how it would effectively change things.

A post from back in January is below. They inadvertently inserted the T ratings but we've discovered that does not apply.

Most importantly, I think the USTA has finally done something right this time. They have effectively eliminated one of the biggest rating loopholes to date. That being the M and T exclusive ratings as well as the Self Rate rule. In summary (and someone please correct me if I'm wrong)

1. If you have a year end M or T rating you still need to self rate the following year and your rating can not be less than your last year-end rating. You have to file an appeal if you want your rating lower than your M or T rating

2. If your self rate expires you can not self rate lower than your last S rating and you have to file an appeal if you want your rating lower than your last S rating.

Maybe that self-rate piece of it was mis-information. Here is what the USTA has issued as major rule changes:

MAJOR REGULATION CHANGES FOR 20111. If an Adult or Senior League consists of only two teams in a level of play, each teammust maintain its roster with at least 60 percent of its players at the designated NTRPlevel of play.2. A player may play only one NTRP level above the player’s current NTRP level in theAdult and Senior Divisions.3. Players who play exclusively in the Mixed Doubles Division and choose to participatein the Adult, Senior, and/or Super Senior Divisions the next year must enter thosedivisions by self-rating with the minimum rating being the higher of the self-rating ormixed exclusive rating.4. Each Section Association shall designate a committee to handle Self-Rate Appealsfor those that appeal their assigned self-rating.5. Any player who is 70 years of age or older prior to, or during, the calendar year inwhich such player plays his/her first local league match and has achieved the samerating level or lower for the three prior years, without benefit of appeal, will be granted anappeal if they are promoted at year-end.6. A Super Senior player is eligible to advance to National Championships competition ifthat player has played on that same team in at least three (3) matches through SectionChampionships. No defaults received by the player during all league competition shallcount for advancing. A retired match shall count for all players involved.

It's not obvious but that post was back in January. The poster had cut and paste it from another chain. This was Jan 13 so the poster obviously had heard some rumblings of changes in the system but admittedly reports that there was some misinformation in the process.

Rule #3 - Dont blame Lance cheating. This rule has been in effect for 2 months. It's been addressed and is being corrected. If you want to blame someone, blame the USTA for implementing new rules but not updating the system.

In principal the USTA has made a lot of drastic changes to the rating system and my initial thoughts are that they have all been for the better. In practice, Yeah, it would be nice if they had done their due diligence to make the transition more seamless but overall - good job.

There are a lot fewer loopholes and opportunities for players to underrate themselves. I think there is and will be a lot more parity in the leagues at all levels. As HTOWN said the perrenial leaders (Freeman, Benzon, Hollis...) will continue to have great teams because that's what they do. They are willing to put in the time to research and recruit the best talent and their reputation preceeds them so they are able to attract the better players. There are fewer ringers, sandbaggers, underrated players who slipped through the system (whatever you want to call them). There are fewer sure wins / locks, etc. Their job is definitely more challenging now and the liklihood of an upset is much more daunting. Trips to Nats is not a guarantee anymore as it has been in the past, but I fully expect them all to be in the mix. Should any of them prevail this year I would think these days the victory should be more satisfying than ever before.